Rebel Staff

After a massive 2011 fire devastated Slave Lake, Alberta, the province investigated and issued a report. However, the recommendations in that report have been ignored by subsequent governments, both Progressive Conservative and NDP.

Comments

Keepers John, this is all you ever shill about, your party? How about commenting on the story. Oh that’s right, it was just another fire, only 80000 evacuated, only current and previous goats ignored report on Slave Lake lessons learned, it’s only a fire bigger than the size of Edmonton. And you want to shill for your party.

And what does it mean to be very left wing? That means nothing as far as I am concerned coming from someone that does not know the difference between centrism, social democratic, liberal conservatism, conservative liberalism, social liberalism, trotskyism, democratic socialism, socialism, communism, maoism and so forth. These definitions all have key distinctions between them and they hold different positions with them being slightly left or slightly right from each other. The liberal party economically is centre to centre-right. It has always been centre to centre-left because they have wanted restraint and an active federal government.

As for what it means to be very left wing that is subjective. It offers nothing about what is within a political party and what of programming and what individual movements would want.

So that can be disregarded. I feel however that politics nowadays is very boring and it lacks the excitement of what five political parties had during the 90’s. I would not mind a middle right party to siphon votes from the Liberals and Conservatives federally.

That is why I am an active Progressive Canadian party (PC party) member, and yes that party is centre-right and they are centrist on social issues.

Global caters to a centre-right agenda because the network is very anti-liberal in their presentation and they do involve issues such as law and order which does cater to the centre-left narrative.

Centrism means “centre-left and centre-right politics both involve a general association with centrism”, which means a bit of the conservative and social democratic viewpoints are involved with centrism or liberalism. That means liberalism is social progress and fiscal responsibility and the fact is CBC and CTV bring on guests which have both centre-right and centre-left viewpoints so that means they are politically mainstream and cater to the mainstream political parties. That means they do favour the Liberal party and that is a conspiracy theory.

Also, mainstream is subjective because having closeness to a political party is by that very definition being part of the mainstream.

Also, this is a form of TDS or JDS which many accused the left of being Harper deranged but this is that theory that the left has numbers with just I would say a few more networks than the right wing. But there is a small difference between being slightly centre-right or centre-right and being right wing.

Centre-right can mean being a bit more conservative and being a red tory while blue toryism is what conservative is constituted as in Canada which means populism, conservatism and is very much in the line of what the Conservatives on Rebel define themselves as which to me is telling people what they want to hear and is very much subjective.

To me, having smaller networks which bring on experts and serve local communities and want to be independent and cover stories that no one brings up like RT and Press TV are what Canada need.

Rebel has lied in the past about Assad and Putin and Germany have put troops in the Baltic states which is tantamount to wanting WW3. Rebel like the mainstream is very much silent on this issue and that is what I have been saying that Rebel wants to be like the mainstream in most cases but cater to an angry and bitter audience. There is nothing wrong with saying many on here are mad as hell.

John said, " … they only bring on guests which are MPs, MPPs and MLAs from conservative-minded parties. "

That is a lie. Brian Lilley and Ezra have both had Liberal guests. Yet the CBC, CTV, and Global bring on left wing guests almost exclusively and the right wing guests are red conservatives (liberals in practice). I don’t hear you calling them liars for doing so.

John said, "This is one of the definitions of independent which is “not belonging to or supported by a political party”. "

That can be one definition, but it is not the only one. Independent can mean and does mean in TheRebel, “an organization that in not part of the main stream media.” TheRebel has not masked that they are a right wing media business. CBC, CTV, Global and others pretend to be non-biased but are in fact very left wing and very in love with Trudeau.

John claims, “The point is you wanted facts and I gave you facts.”

No John, you have not provided any facts whatsoever. You have just given your opinion. A fact must include a reference to something outside your opinion, like a link to an unbiased article, or a link to statscan. Just reworking what you have already said, is not a fact.

I do not feel that the NDP is the best party in Alberta watching from Ontario. To me, The Alberta party seems like they should be given a chance to govern and they have the correct balance, but who am I to judge being from Ontario.

I do feel that elections should not be the only time for people to decide. I lean very favourably towards direct democracy but all parties whether you disagree with me or not want absolute power which means they want no checks and balances which is common in democracy nowadays because parties want to have their true agenda go forward.

Besides the fact that forest fires happen all the time in Canada the fact is yes they should have prepared but how much preparation is truly enough and how many resources have to be used. That is what I meant by what I said. It is easy to be a reactionary when as I stated in my previous argument it is easy to rail against a government which you yourself oppose. That is what I meant. It is obvious based on the definition that Rebel wants to return to a state in Alberta where the right wing supposedly in the normalcy of how Alberta is governed which Rebel wants. They want no independence movement which they have claimed they are independent conservatives which means that they should not be guided by a political party or movement, but they do regularly invite MPs, MPPs and / or MLAs. I have just proven by that and my previous comments that Rebel is neither independent or a truly factual network and they have lied regularly.

After viewing another Google definition which has proven my point yet again the view of Rebel exemplifies that they are reactionaries and want to return to “a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which they believe possessed characteristics (discipline, respect for authority, etc.) that are negatively absent from the contemporary status quo of a society”, which is what they want. They believe Alberta by that definition should always remain in the hands of the right wing. That alone shows that they have a sense of entitlement of wanting a certain ideology in power. It is the usual left-right divide which I have been talking about which has more to do I believe with religion rather than good policy.

As for your talk about socialism, that is a load of nonsense coming from someone that would not know the difference of what it means to be a centrist versus being social democratic, social liberal, socialist or communist or trotskyist. These are different variant ideologies. I can pull them up but the evidence and facts are obvious that you do not know which differentiates each of them.

I can pull up links which can show this.

I am a member of the Canadian Action party and I even had to show Drew on here what nationalists truly believe.

What do you say about even right wing nationalists advocating for protectionism? Does that make them socialist? No, it does not because you can be nationalist and left wing. That is why the SNP in Scotland holds the Scottish parliament. National Socialism is a far-right ideology which scapegoats, is anti-immigrant and is for protectionism and a strong military state, and even Hitler’s Nazi Party was for Christianity as the state religion. Many like to deny this on the right but it is true. Understanding history is what is key to knowing how each ideology can fair with the political position in the spectrum. Many on Rebel do not know this. They believe any form of statism is socialism, when they work differently based on the political position they occupy. Nazis were very anti-Marxist and anti-Communist and anti-Socialist. That tells you all you need to know. I am a centrist nationalist that values fiscal responsibility, social progress and protectionism to build up the jobs market and give young Canadians a better future. The other lie which has to be called out is everyone works hard. It is the economic structure that exists which is detrimental to certain people. To suggest people do not work hard is patting yourself on the back and only suggests that they just need to work harder to attain what you have which is selfishness and hatred for people not like you. That is the problem with greed and it is why nationalism is the best way to fix our crumbling institutions and the current form of capitalism. It is no wonder Trump is gaining with his right wing nationalism. Trump understands that the system we have is not good for the long term. I agree.

But they do cater to a right wing agenda because they only bring on guests which are MPs, MPPs and MLAs from conservative-minded parties. That alone is enough to show where their allegiances lie and that is the very definition of wanting only conservative parties in power, when they have used the claim that they call themselves independent.

This is one of the definitions of independent which is “not belonging to or supported by a political party”. Sounds pretty obvious to me and this came from a Google definition.

To me even minor parties fall within that definition of independence because they stand no chance and I thought that Rebel wanted such an independent movement. What they have shown themselves to be is trying to influence movements to ensure they go in a conservative direction and that means mainstream PC or Conservative parties winning.

As for forest fires, they happen all the time. Rebel is merely pointing to one so that Wildrose will win provincially. Rebel has not shied away from saying where they stand on who they support provincially in Alberta. Of course, Wildrose did cross the floor and that should not be ignored about how they wanted power so easily, so that cannot be ignored. You want to understand facts understand the whole picture.

Don’t forget this is the same Rebel which continuously lies about Assad using chemical weapons which cannot be proven. This is the same Rebel which lies about Putin being a dictator when the United Russia party wins in the Duma. There are many times when Rebel has lied and I just pointed them out.

John Siciliano: What a joke. Th TV stations all spew the lefty propaganda. Here you gt a serious challenge to that. I appreciate haring all the different points of view and try to keep an open mind on the issues which is why I say even if someone believed global warming was the cause of increased fires it would still be an extremely difficult job to know which fire was caused by an increase in temperature as opposed to the ones that occur naturally anyhow. And yes use of controlled burns has been largely effective to reduce wildfires.

But this article does not claim that the Alberta government ( either PC or NDP) should have foreseen the fire, but that they should have been prepared for the possibility of a fire. That is what TheRebel is saying.

So, like a usual socialist troll, you twist (lie) what people say and then rail against you straw man argument.

Deiter Cunth said, “We don’t have a government that does around sabotaging industries.”

Yes, well good for you. No one here except the socialist idiot trolls want this NDP government in power. Not much we can do about it until 2019 … an election that will mark the eradication of the NDP in Alberta.

Rebel is not interested in telling the truth but catering to a right wing agenda which is its mandate I am sure because they do not care about being independent. Having independence would suggest that they are separate from the major party structure in Ottawa when they speak regularly to MPPs and MPs and MLAs, so they cannot claim to be independent-minded. As a centrist nationalist from the Canadian Action party, a minor party, and a person that holds three memberships I have to say that Rebel came on the air trying to influence the federal election and other levels thinking they could change minds. I think Canada deserves better and networks that truly reflect local communities and the children and grandchildren of the future should be taught political science with no preference to how their grandparents or parents voted in prior elections. That way, we can get what old Reform party types used to call for which is choice and I see no choices in federal and provincial elections but mainstream oligarchs and quite frankly Rebel is just protecting their interests and they seem to not want choice in how we do our elections. That means they are anti-freedom, anti-choice and very much against democracy and free and fair elections just like the mainstream political class.

This is just reactionary garbage because this just shows that Rebel wants people to point at a report and say yup parties did not see this report and they could have prepared. It is just reactionary and quite frankly no one could have seen this coming which is the honest truth. It is necessary to realize that being reactionary is a very easy trait to exhibit because it just means to focus on events to give oneself and the movement that you support credence to ensure that it grows and prospers and to me that movement which is wanted by Rebel is either a merger of the PCs and Wildrose or simply wanting to aide Wildrose, when the purpose of government and media should be to just present the news and to be factual about it. Stories like this show that Rebel is a network of shock journalism to gain ratings amongst people that think alike which is why Rebel and its supporters are deeply addicted to right wing groupthink. They have also been very supporter of right wing political correctness by never wanting to attack movements which are allied to the Rebel network like Christians. That shows that the story I saw this week from certain newspapers do show that the mainstream left just like the mainstream right which Rebel is a part of is deeply mired in right wing groupthink and its own version of promoting movements so they can gain power.

This link shows groupthink and political correctness are just tools used by the right when as a minor party supporter they impact both sides and end reasonable political debate and it shows the weakness of the right wing arguments.

Dylan you are full of it. A new name for a troll suddenly appears out of the blue.
The green kooks have still not faced up to the pine beetle disaster they pushed for with their ignorance, they will not admit their ignorance in this either. I wonder how many millions of trees were burned due to not taking care of the pine beetle and how many tons of carbon that produced?

Ignoring the results of the Slave Lake investigation is just the tip of the iceberg behind what is very likely a false flag operation. A dozen SJWs with flare guns or tubes (not illegal and easily obtainable) can start massive wildfires in these conditions. Moreover, the aftermath of Ft. McMurray, I foresee there will be action against rebuilding much of the community, treating like a Chernobyl. I foresee restrictions on the size of populations living near/in Boreal forests, effectively diminishing the numbers of personnel at the Oilsands projects, rendering them nearly inoperable.

With the loss of about 1 million bbls of oil from global oil production, Canada will be broke before long. Fortunately, here in Texas, oil and gas production continues unabated. Why? We don’t have a government that does around sabotaging industries.

@ Dylan McLernon commented 1 hour ago
Obviously you know squat about fire fighting and that you haven’t been there for awhile – because in 2012/13, I worked there and toured the areas that burned hardest and bush was right across the streets & back alleys of many of the houses on the greater part of the western side subdivisions. Yes fire can jump long ways – but that needs to be taken into account – tree huggers’ wishes be damned! It’s time that the wishes & fantasies of Eco-terrorists be ignored and rational reasoning be used to protect properties & towns in forest areas. I think what is going to happen, is that insurance companies are going to amend their policies to take into account these vital facts.
Oh, and enough bad mouthing Ezra – he & the Rebel.media is doing what no other news agency dares doing! Asking the right objective questions & telling the truth. If you don’t like it, the CBC & CTV cater to people who only like hearing things they “like”. The Rebel.media does not cater to Libtards & PC indoctrinated sheeples.

What’s with the eco radical’s thing with trees? It’s just fine to cut them down in a responsible fashion. Trees don’t live forever, and once they are cut down, they grow back.
We have now and have always had billions of trees. There is no shortage of trees.
In Canada, we have a long history of human requirements taking precedence over the absolute preservation of the forests. Trees were a major impediment to early settlers. The land had to be cleared before it could be accessed and the soil could be tilled. In Upper Canada, sure you got 200 acres of “free land” but you had to clear five acres of land, build a home and open the road along the front of your lot. No small feat in the 1790’s. Yes, Ontario no longer has huge tracts of trees with girths of three to five feet, but what we do have is some of the most beautiful farmland anywhere (albeit blemished by forests of misbegotten windturbines).
Failure to cut firebreaks around Fort Mac flys in the face of reason and Canadian tradition. It is negligence of the worst sort.

Alberta Buck… Fort McMurray had fire breaks + 500 meter wide river and the fire jumped both of them. You ever live up there? I sure did… I was born there and spent 16 years of my life there. The weather up there right now is abnormal. You are talking to someone who spent many seasons hunting, fishing , camping and hiking in the areas which burned.

All forests produce burnable material, who knew? And forest fires have been happening for thousands of Years. Who knew. There is nothing strange or out of the ordinary for a forest to catch on fire. Or a field of grass for that matter.
I would bet, that there is likely a fire burning in some forest or some grass land more than 50% of the time. And the random effects of Rain effect when they are put out. No fault of any warming or cooling or man or nature, Its just what happens when you grow a whole lot of wood or grass.

This coming from the same dumb bastard who in the same article claims how proper fire breaks are completely ineffective…and then 24 hour later is professing how wonderful they are and how safe all the oil sands plants are because they use them…WTF? Government…. fire breaks are useless. Private industry….fire breaks are great. Go figure.